In Re Entropin, Inc. Securities Litigation

Good Law
487 F. Supp. 2d 1141·2007 WL 1404431·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35157
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 3, 2007CV04 6180 RCCalifornia6,624 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chapman, J.

CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL

PROCEEDINGS: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY

On November 6, 2006, individual defendants Higgins D. Bailey and Thomas G. Tachovsky filed a notice of motion and motion for summary judgment, a supporting memorandum of points and authorities, the supporting declarations of Paris A. Wynn, Higgins D. Bailey, and Thomas G. Tachovsky, and a statement of undisputed facts and conclusions of law, with exhibits. On December 11, 2006, defendant Entro-pin, Inc. filed a notice of motion and motion of joinder in the individual defendants’ motion for summary judgment and the supporting declaration of Alan S. Petlak, with exhibits, and lodged a separate state ment of undisputed material facts. On February 28, 2007, plaintiffs filed an opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment, a supporting memorandum of points and authorities, the opposing declarations of Eldred Giefer and Laurence Ro-sen, with exhibits, and an opposing separate statement of disputed and undisputed material facts. On March 26, 2007, the individual defendants and defendant En-tropin filed replies and responses to plaintiffs’ opposing separate statement of facts, and individual…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.